SACRAMENTO, Calif.  Archbishop Jose H. Gomez of Los Angeles and immigrant advocate groups praised Gov. Jerry Brown for signing into law the rest of the California DREAM Act, allowing undocumented students who have graduated from a California high school to apply for state financial aid to attend college at a state school.

Brown signed the first half of the measure in July to make immigrant students attending California State University, California community colleges or the University of California eligible, on or after Jan. 1, 2012, to receive scholarships and loans from private funds.

Brown announced Oct. 8 he had signed the rest of the measure allowing them to apply for state aid.

The governors signature clears the path for immigrant students to further their education so that they can one day contribute their talents and skills to the betterment of our society, Archbishop Gomez said in a statement released that day.

These students have already demonstrated their academic ability and commitment; they deserve the opportunity to pursue their goals for the future, he added.

Under current law, undocumented immigrant students who have graduated from a California high school after attending the school for three or more years and can prove theyre on the path to legalize their immigration status can pay resident tuition rates.

The California DREAM Act, or the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act had the support of the California Catholic Conference, the public policy arm of the states Catholic bishops.

Among other groups that applauded Brown for his action was Voto Latino, a nonpartisan group that promotes voter registration among Latinos ages 18 and up.

California today made a wise investment in its future, said Maria Teresa Kumar, the organizations executive director.

Brown and state lawmakers showed vision and bravery by legislating with an eye on the future of the states workforce and economy, she said. California has already invested in these students education. Todays signing assures they will be able to deliver a return on that investment by becoming Californias entrepreneurs, engineers and doctors.

One critic of the measure, Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, a Republican from Hesperia, told The Associated Press the new law was fundamentally wrong and unfair, calling it an insult to people who have played by the rules and entered the United States legally.

According to Donnelly, polls show that between 80 percent and 90 percent of Californians, both Democrats and Republicans, are against the DREAM Act.

Assemblyman Gil Cedillo, a Los Angeles Democrat who sponsored the bill, and other supporters of the law say that students brought illegally to the United States by their parents when they were children should not be penalized by being denied financial aid and having to pay out-of-state tuition.

Archbishop Jose H. Gomez of Los Angeles and immigrant advocate groups praised Gov. Jerry Brown for signing into law the rest of the California DREAM Act, allowing undocumented students who have graduated from a California high school to apply for state financial aid to attend college at a state school....

....The governors signature clears the path for immigrant students to further their education so that they can one day contribute their talents and skills to the betterment of our society, Archbishop Gomez said in a statement released that day. These students have already demonstrated their academic ability and commitment; they deserve the opportunity to pursue their goals for the future, he added....The California DREAM Act, or the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act had the support of the California Catholic Conference, the public policy arm of the states Catholic bishops.

It’s weird watching this play out against the OWS “free college” demands, and of course, the sky-rocketing cost of college, the debt that results, and the B.S. nature of most degrees. College is becoming a racket and nothing else, and if immigrants want their chance to get rooked, well... now they have it.

If you have no choice in the matter, its not charity! Its not charity when its wrung out of you in tax form. This bishop is a foo' if he can't see that. Religious leaders need to stick to abortion and stop trying to influence the border situation.

What everyone fails to acknowledge is that Archbishop Jose Gomez became a U. S. citizen the RIGHT way, by studying, taking the test, and then the oath of citizenship. He is a legal immigrant and wants others to do it that way too.

What everyone fails to acknowledge is that Archbishop Jose Gomez became a U. S. citizen the RIGHT way, by studying, taking the test, and then the oath of citizenship. He is a legal immigrant and wants others to do it that way too.

Sorry you may have been so mislead.

Who's sorry now? Catholic Archbishop Jose Gomez, who is often heralded by Catholic FReepers as being a "conservative" Catholic, is instead a very vocal supporter of illegal immigrants. The California DREAM Act's passage ought to put to rest the lie that he is some kind of conservative. In his own words:

America is a nation built by immigrants, and illegal immigrants  Irish, Italian, German, Polish and others  have always been part of the mix. But throughout U.S. history, Catholics have carried the burden of anti-immigrant prejudice in a unique way, so we have a special duty to speak up when we see it happening again.

I remembered this last week as I thought about two separate but related events.

The first was the copy of Foreign Policy magazine I received in the mail. In its March/April issue, Samuel Huntington argues that Hispanic immigrants, because of their differences from the American mainstream in language and culture and their resistance to assimilation, pose a serious threat to the American way of life. Huntington is a world-class intellectual writing in a prestigious national journal. In effect, he gives a credible-sounding vocabulary to the worst kind of nativism.

The second event was last week's struggle in the Colorado Legislature over House Bill 1187, designed to deny in-state resident tuition to the children of undocumented immigrants.

In her comments on the bill, State Senator Paula Sandoval said it best when she observed that, "All of these children (of undocumented workers) want to achieve the American dream. In some ways, what we're really saying is it's OK for people to come to this country to clean the university, to plow the fields, to harvest the crops and to work in our restaurants. But when it comes to enjoying the fruits of those labors, what we're doing ... is saying you're not invited to sit at the table for dinner."

I saw Senator Sandoval's comments the same day I read this passage from Samuel Huntington's Foreign Policy article: "The education of people of Mexican origin in the United States lags well behind the U.S. norm. In 2000, 86.6 percent of native-born Americans had graduated from high school. The rates for foreign-born population in the United States varied from 94.9 percent for Africans, 83.8 percent for Asians, 49.6 percent for Latin Americans overall, and down to 33.8 percent for Mexicans, who ranked lowest."

Most Americans, native-born or not, know what the expression "Catch 22" means. We've got a great example of it here.

For Huntington, Mexican immigrants have an alarmingly low education rate. That depresses their earning power, which prevents their upward mobility, which reduces their assimilation into the American mainstream. So what are Coloradans urged to do? We're urged to make it more expensive  in other words, harder  for the children of undocumented workers to get a college education. As a result, they'll earn less, contribute less to the public square and assimilate even more slowly. The one thing they won't do is go away.

Good people can disagree strongly and legitimately about immigration and its related legal issues. But in making U.S. immigration policies more coherent and just, we need to at least avoid punishing the young.

In hurting them, we're only hurting ourselves. And we're making absolutely sure that Huntington's nightmare will come true.

Colorado Senate Bill 67 died on Valentine's Day in the Senate's Government, Veterans and Military Relations Committee. Its defeat will hurt many good people in our state, and concerned citizens need to hope, pray and work earnestly to ensure that next year, the legislative result will be different.

SB 67 would have allowed undocumented immigrants to apply for driver's licenses. The main arguments in favor of such legislation are well known. They're worth restating one more time, though, so they remain fresh in people's minds. SB 67 may be dead for this year, but the underlying need for it is very much alive.

First, SB 67-style legislation would serve our public safety.

Colorado has a legitimate health and safety interest in licensing those who use its roads. More than 50,000 undocumented immigrants now drive on state roads unlicensed. If a job is at stake  a job that requires driving  a worker who cannot apply for a license will almost certainly drive anyway. And of course, unlicensed drivers are uninsured drivers, which makes them far more likely to flee the scene of an accident.

Second, SB 67-style legislation would aid law enforcement. A driver's license makes it easier to track outstanding warrants, repeat offenders and child support delinquents. It expands the database of fingerprints for crime investigation. It increases the willingness of immigrant witnesses and victims to aid crime investigations. It allows police to deal with traffic violators without becoming embroiled in policy issues. It also relieves police from issuing tickets for which there is no possible resolution. (Immigrants are rarely deported for driving and usually return  unlicensed  to Colorado roads.)

Third, it would not violate federal immigration law. Immigration law places no requirement on states regarding the licensing of drivers. The Immigration and Naturalization Service is not significantly interested in unlicensed drivers; rather, INS priorities focus on serious foreign criminals, terrorists and immigrant smugglers.

Moreover, state driver's licenses are irrelevant to work eligibility, government programs and benefits.

Fourth, it would arguably assist the fight against terrorism. Colorado licenses provide a database of identities including photographs and fingerprints. Excluding large numbers of people from this database could actually work against police efforts

Fifth and finally, it's the right thing to do. No one is a "criminal" for merely being an undocumented immigrant; it's a status with no criminal penalty. In fact, Colorado is host to thousands of working undocumented immigrants  and depends economically on their labor. A driver's license simply allows these people to drive safely and with insurance in Colorado while the U.S. Congress debates future policy on immigration.

Shortly before the recent debate on SB 67, Archbishop Charles Chaput wrote to key members of the State Senate noting that, "SB 67 acknowledges the reality that thousands of good but undocumented immigrant workers live in our state, contribute productively to our economy and deserve the ability to travel safely and with insurance while here. I'm convinced that SB 67 will help improve security on our roads for the whole community, and it will add a very worthwhile element of stability to the lives of immigrant workers and their families."

SB 67 was a bill that urgently deserved to be a law. Both justice and common sense support it. We need to remember that for next year. This is an issue Coloradans can't afford to forget.

Mexicans are far more observant than white California residents.. they like their pews and baskets filled

Bulls***. Mexicans (as opposed to Mexican-Americans) are the worst stewards in the Church. They plead poverty when signing their children up for sacrament classes, then they drive up in nice cars with their kids wearing expensive clothes. Then they bitch that they're being picked on because they're Mexican. I've seen it.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.